First-quarter deal making shows glimmers of growth

2017 deal making opens with a bang, though transaction volume remains low.

For the fourth year in a row the biopharma M&A market opened with a bang. The $30bn takeout of Actelion is likely to rank as one of the biggest deals of 2017, although investors and bankers alike will hope that the sector has more left in the tank.

Few other transactions in the first quarter stand out. However, a small uptick in underlying values and volumes can possibly be detected; while the data do not paint a clear picture of recovery, at least activity has not dimmed any further (see graph and tables below).

This analysis looks only at companies involved in human therapeutics – it excludes medtech or diagnostic companies, for example.

Beyond the Actelion takeover, the $10bn spent on 53 deals in the opening three months of the year represents a small uplift over the previous quarter and is largely in line with the first quarter of 2016.

A look at the last full five years shows that if these levels continue 2017 will end up marginally more productive for those in the business of deal making – although not by much.

In 2014 and 2015 the first quarter's big deals ended up being bested, although last year opened with what turned out to be its largest – Shire's buyout of Baxalta. For those hoping that 2017’s M&A record will surpass last year’s dismal output a couple of other $10bn-plus deal will be needed.

Five-year M&A

Period

Combined deal value ($bn)

Deal count

Q1 2017

40.3

54

2016

104.2

193

2015

188.9

283

2014

220.2

228

2013

79.6

225

2012

43.8

222

April has already yielded the prospect of several sizeable transactions, which is a promising sign. This week it was announced that Stada Arzneimittel had accepted a $5.6bn bid from private equity, and it looks like Akorn could receive a similar-sized approach from Fresenius. Still, activity in the German generics and sterile injectables markets is unlikely to get the pulses racing for those hoping to see buyers emerge for high-risk, high-value biotech assets.

Takeda and Lilly have provided some action here, moving on Ariad and Colucid in January, deals ranked in the top five takeouts of the first quarter. They bring their new owners an increased presence in oncology and a promising late-stage migraine asset respectively.

Sanpower’s purchase of what is left of Dendreon ranks as the fifth-biggest deal last quarter, just inching ahead of Celgene’s acquisition of Delinia. The autoimmune-focused start-up had been established for little more than 12 months and raised only $35m when Celgene came calling; the transaction no doubt warmed the hearts of venture backers desperate to know that buyers remain interested in early-stage assets.

Five biggest pharma and biotech M&A deals announced in Q1 2017

Acquirer

Target

Value ($bn)

Month announced

Deal status

Johnson & Johnson

Actelion

30.0

Jan

Open

Takeda

Ariad Pharmaceuticals

5.2

Jan

Closed

Ipsen

Merrimack oncology assets

1.0

Jan

Open

Eli Lilly

Colucid Pharmaceuticals

1.0

Jan

Closed

Sanpower

Dendreon

0.8

Jan

Open

Valuations recovered somewhat across the biopharma sector in the first few months of the year, and in many cases remain close to historical highs. This continues to prevent many big buyers from bidding for assets that have long been considered targets.

On top of this, healthcare reform remains a live issue in the US, and action on pricing is still an unknown quantity; acquirers must be struggling to get comfortable with long-term forecasts.

None of this will help M&A recover to levels seen in the midst of the biotech boom, even considering that the pressure is on several big players – Gilead and Sanofi for example – to buy, and that funds are easily accessible for any company with a cash flow.

In any case, the deal frenzy of 2014 and 2015 must surely be considered an anomaly rather than the new normal. However, the valuations of companies tipped as targets suggest that many investors are not ready to accept this.

Presumably, if the deals fail to materialise this year, this valuation gap will be confirmed, and should narrow. Which raises a crucial question – who will blink first?